Jai Lokenath Oil Extraction P. Ltd. v. DCIT

251 Taxmann 22High Court2017#4219 most cited

What is Jai Lokenath Oil Extraction P. Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

In unabated assessment proceedings under Section 153A, the Assessing Officer's additions are limited to incriminating material found during search, otherwise, the assessment can only be reiterated.

28

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Jai Lokenath Oil Extraction · 153A · incriminating material · unabated assessment · search proceedings · assessment procedure · Assessing Officer · completed assessment

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Jai Lokenath Oil Extraction P. Ltd. v. DCIT

DCIT, CC-5(4), , MUMBAI vs. SHRI RAJENDERKUMAR MIGLANI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 2925/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2925/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit, Central Circle-5(4) बिधम/ Rajindrakumar Miglani Room No.1927, 19Th Floor, Uttam House, 69, P „Dmello Vs. Air India Building, Nariman Road, Carnac Bunder, Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400009. & Cross Objection No.20/Mum/2021 आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2925/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Rajindrakumar Miglani बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-5(4) Room No.1927, 19Th Floor, Uttam House, 69, P „Dmello Vs. Road, Carnac Bunder, Air India Building, Nariman Mumbai-400009. Point, Mumbai-400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpm7288D (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Sanjeev Kashyp (Dr) Assessee By: Shri K Shivaram & Rahul Hakani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/03/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/04/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue As Well As Assessee Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeal As Well As Cross-Objection Against The Order Dated 25.02.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-53, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010-11. C.O. No.20/Mum2021 A.Y.2010-11

For Appellant: Shri K Shivaram & Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyp (DR)
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM AND S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2925/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) DCIT, Central Circle-5(4) बिधम/ Rajindrakumar Miglani Room No.1927, 19th Floor, Uttam House, 69, P „Dmello Vs. Air India Building, Nariman Road, Carnac Bunder, Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400009. & Cross Objection No.20/Mum/2021 आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2925/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Rajindrakumar Miglani बिधम/ DCIT, Central Circle-5(4) Room No.1927, 19th Floor, Uttam House, 69, P „Dmello Vs. Road,…

M/S SHRIGOPAL RAMESHKUMAR SALES PVT. LTD ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMISSIONER CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 163/NAG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 163/Nag/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Shrigopal Ramesh Kumar Sales Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Sarvodaya Cloth Market, Gandhibagh, Nagpur. Pan : Aabcs9226J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vijay Chandak, Ca Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Headoo, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Chandak, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Headoo, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…d assessment and cannot make any independent addition. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgments of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Gurinder Singh Bawa 384 ITR 483(Bom) and that in the case of CIT Vs. Deepak kumar Agarwal (2017) 251 Taxmann 22 (Bom). Also, a similar view had been taken by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla, (2016) 380 ITR 573( Del.). In the aforementioned cases, it had been observed by the Hon’ble High Courts that in case of an unabated assessment the scope of addition/disallowance to be made u/s.153A of the Act would be restricted t…

Showing 120 of 28 · Page 1 of 2